HomeHomeSupportSupportBulk EmailerBulk EmailerProblem with HTML encoding by your moduleProblem with HTML encoding by your module
Previous
 
Next
New Post
11/20/2009 7:02 AM
 
User is offline Will
No Ranking

Joined: 9/19/2009
Posts: 55
We started using a new HTML/CSS newsletter and we're getting two significant problems when the e-mails are rendered by your Bulk Mailer module. First, module is re-writing or encoding external URL for e-mail tracking and the second is images are displaced on Webmail readers such as MSN Hotmail and Google.
 
Here's a sample of the re-write that's occuring. The external URL for the first link in our newsletter should be  Moreover, this error occurs randomly. It breaks it MS Outlook and Outlook Web Access (i.e.Webmail reader). However, it works fine in Outlook Express. Here's an excerpt of the code using "View Source" in MS Outlook.
 
D>
           
             
             
               

                 

Monday 16th, November 2009


                 

Career Assessment: Critical Insight for
                  Job Seekers


                 

In a tough job market a bit of insight can make all the
                  difference. Jennifer Hay's free IT Career Assessment ($200
                  value) is designed to help you look inside yourself and your
                  career. You'll find the right words and phrases to tell others
                  why you are a unique, talented, and valuable IT Specialist.                   href=" 
                  More »

                  src="cid:BULKEMAILER$ID$2"
                  width=307 height=125>
 
As for the image displacement in Gmail and Hotmail, I'm not sure what is happening. But if it's any clue, there are gray boxes displayed in the body of the message where the images should be, instead of the familiar "x". And the images are displayed in heap at the end of the email.
 
Finally,
 
The email is a HTML/CSS template that is edited in MS Expression Web and then displayed in IE8 as a preview function and then saved as an MHT file for loading into the Bulk Mailer module for distribution.
 
Thanks for your help in this matter.

Will
 
 
New Post
11/20/2009 11:05 PM
 
User is offline DNN Module Support
1st Level Poster

Joined: 8/28/2006
Posts: 2049
Can you please zip up the MHTML you used. A saved .eml or .ost version of the outlook email recieved. a screen shot of it rendering in outlook, and a screen shot of the hotmail.
 
The post them here as a .zip attached file. Thanks.
 
New Post
11/21/2009 4:35 PM
 
User is offline DNN Module Support
1st Level Poster

Joined: 8/28/2006
Posts: 2049
We have looked again at your orginal post and what you are mentioning is some limitations of web browser rendering of some MHT files format.
 
MHT or MHTML is a single file web page technology and is designed by Micrsoft. Most clients try to display the technology correctly, but the end result is not a guarantee.
 
In your case, as you are creating the email in HTML. Why not just send the email that way, with full url for images.
 
Our system uses a conversion of MS word to MHTML or we suggest in the manual using word to create, then publishing to MHTML. We cannot predict the exact format of the read on all browser based email clients, as some may not well support MHTML.
 
I am sure you know how much MS suck at following standards, and this is no exception. But you may get better results by keeping it all as simple as possible, or using the HTML template directly without using the MHTML function.
 
New Post
11/21/2009 4:52 PM
 
User is offline Will
No Ranking

Joined: 9/19/2009
Posts: 55
Right, MS sets their own standards and expects everyone to follow them. :-) Can't blame them when they own 94% of the desktops! Anyway, thanks for examinig the code. Let me try what you suggested and see if that fixes. I was saving the files in using IE8, so maybe that's the culprit. I'm also going to try some other templates to see if they behave better or ones I can just plunk into the editor directly.
 
Thanks,

Will
 
P.S. Did you hear IE 9 is going to support GPU offloading for faster rendering performance and support for HTML 5.0.?
 
 
New Post
11/21/2009 5:09 PM
 
User is offline DNN Module Support
1st Level Poster

Joined: 8/28/2006
Posts: 2049
I did not hear that about IE9. But Don't get me started on MS.
 
I do know that for $39.00 Snow Leopard is 56% faster loading and 10 GB less hard disk, and Windows 7 is 5 times the price, and exactly the same speed as Vista on my system. Basically if I don't want to reorder my open applications or stick to the bigger task bar, then Windows 7 is a complete waste of time and money!
 
I do know that of all the browsers I test on, IE is the slowest, biggest and least favorite of mine to use. Has crap history search, is annoying with security (especially out of the box on any server) and... keeps giving me this annoying "loading" message and no content, until I turn of all the new features that supposedly make IE8 an advantage over IE7. Once I knock it back to have compatibility, and turn of the memory segregation etc then is work mostly.
 
Then there is all the applications written by MS that require IE for their persistent use of non standard active X. This crap security flawed model of custom non standard code is still being used in recently released applications like MS CRM 4.0. Why oh why did they not use silverlight or something that would be supported cross browser.
 
.... and I'm just getting warmed up!   --- so I better stop there.
 
Now I will check my spelling using the Google add in, because IE is the only browser I have that does not support spell check, and because I was using MS CRM when I hit your post. I am using IE to post this. (hope it does not crash out before I hit update!)
 
New Post
11/21/2009 5:21 PM
 
User is offline Will
No Ranking

Joined: 9/19/2009
Posts: 55
LOL, I hear ya man! I'm a total MS fan, but then again I'm not a programmer. I'm more of systems guy, so I typically get Windows working for me pretty well. Now, I can't agree with you about Windows 7 64-bit. It's awesome fast booting and virtually crash proof. And believe me I run a lot of crap on my machine. I just loaded Office 2012 and it's screams. It's 64-bit Office! Looks like they took the frigging bloat out of it just like Windows 7. I'm a totally happy camper with it all, but of course not with IE 8. Maybe IE 9 will do the trick. They really are cleaning up their act on the systems side if you ask me. Office 2007 and Vista totally suck in speed and bloatware in comparison. 
 
New Post
11/21/2009 5:44 PM
 
User is offline DNN Module Support
1st Level Poster

Joined: 8/28/2006
Posts: 2049
I honestly don't see a difference. I times it and all.
 
I was running Vista 64 bit, and gotta say that that was very reliable although annoying with things like the search and Exploring views.
 
Windows 7 64 bit boots a round 2% faster and is only marginally less annoying in some ways, and totally more annoying in others. Tried making a movie with movie maker (CRASH). Tried searching for a file that you only remember half the words in the name of the file.  (Fail!). Tried using multiple monitors and having a cross monitor task bar.  Cash / fail. Tried to tell movie a window to the top of the monitor, Explain to buggery / Fail. Tried to move a window too quickly and done a shake... What's that about anyway..
 
Personally I was a fan of MS, until they started delivering features I did not want and breaking reliability of stuff I need. Office 2000 (great) 2003 (great) 2007 (sucks like a groper)... I sill cannot print an outlook calendar that has an appointment that goes longer than a week after 3 years and service patches.
It worked in the beta, but MS think that not enough people complain about the known problem for them to warrant fixing it.
 
Well screw them!
 
I got an I phone and loved it so much, because the frigging thing worked about 1,000,000 times more reliable then the last 6 versions of MS based phones I had.  So I started watching the Apple VS PC ads. Just love them....  I keep looking at them for fun.http://www.apple.com/getamac/ads/ (don't expect that to work on IE8... my add in has not since updating to windows 7).  So recently I actually purchased a mac pro... best / fastest and most amazing laptop I have ever had. Cold boot to running in 16.5 seconds! Battery 7 hours easy!
 
Just some of the known issues with Outlook 2007. http://www.slipstick.com/outlook/ol20... that make me wonder why I updated!
 
How about fixing these before giving me a new version!   
 
Now I would like a look at Office 2000 whatever!  but I still support people from time to time who installed IE beta version way back on XP and still have never recovered from the experience. There is no way to recover short of a total re-install. Personally I think I am a beta tester for Vista, as it took them 12 months to get that working, and Office 2007. Still craps out often... so guess I am a beta tester of that too!
 
New Post
11/21/2009 5:48 PM
 
User is offline DNN Module Support
1st Level Poster

Joined: 8/28/2006
Posts: 2049
Lastly.. if you want to know why Outlook 2007 renders MHTML differently from outlook 2003, and IE 8... this is because the outlook dev team decided to write their own html render rather than use the IE one.
 
Why?
 
Reliability! - Ask and MS Office programmer!
 
That says it all there!
 
New Post
11/21/2009 5:52 PM
 
User is offline Will
No Ranking

Joined: 9/19/2009
Posts: 55
Yes, Outlook 2007 sucks--lots of problems. One cool feature of Office 2010 is that it groups related e-mails into threads like Google does. I just loaded it tonight so still just trying to figure out precisely how it works. Sounds like you are on your way to being an Apple fan. :-) I've had no problems with my Windows Mobile device (Blackjack) for two years now, but it is a bit kludgy interface granted. My Exchange email is automatically pushed to it and I have access to my hotmail for personal. So I really love it. Just checked the new HTC Windows Mobile touch screen phone. Guess what? Sloooooooowwww!! Not ready for prime time yet, IHMO.
 
New Post
11/21/2009 5:54 PM
 
User is offline Will
No Ranking

Joined: 9/19/2009
Posts: 55
Sounds like the right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing. So typical of GIANT companies like Microsoft.
 
New Post
11/22/2009 5:01 AM
 
User is offline DNN Module Support
1st Level Poster

Joined: 8/28/2006
Posts: 2049
Yep
 
New Post
11/23/2009 1:37 PM
 
User is offline Will
No Ranking

Joined: 9/19/2009
Posts: 55
Ok, Dave. I figured it out. It was definitely the short cut I was taking using IE 8 to save encapsulate all of the newsletter text and images by saving it as an MHT template for the Bulk User Module. When I pasted the template and manually added the images and links, the newsletter renders perfectly fine now in all of the readers I tested.
 
Thanks for the suggestion in doing this!
 
Will
 
New Post
11/23/2009 1:47 PM
 
User is offline DNN Module Support
1st Level Poster

Joined: 8/28/2006
Posts: 2049
That kind of makes sence too, because the engine that renders MHT text in IE is different from the engine that does this in Office 2007 applications. As mentioned this is because MS brok away from their own standards between the two teams who fevelop IE and Office.
 
Another shining example of the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing... and We Share You Pain!
 
 
 Page 1 of 1
Previous
 
Next
HomeHomeSupportSupportBulk EmailerBulk EmailerProblem with HTML encoding by your moduleProblem with HTML encoding by your module


Copyright (c) 2017 InteractiveWebs : Terms Of Use : Privacy Statement